AzTrials
AzTrials

Rheumatoid ArthritisPhase 3FINCH 2NCT02873936

Filgotinib Versus Placebo in Adults With Active Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) Who Have an Inadequate Response to Biologic Disease-modifying Anti-rheumatic Drug(s) (DMARDs) Treatment

A Phase 3 study testing Filgotinib and csDMARDs in people with Rheumatoid Arthritis, run by Gilead Sciences at 104 sites in 15 countries.

Completed

Finished. The study has ended and is not enrolling. Results may be posted on the official record.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

The primary objective of this study is to evaluate the effects of filgotinib versus placebo for the treatment of signs and symptoms of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) as measured by the percentage of participants achieving an American College of Rheumatology 20% improvement response (ACR20) at Week 12. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 18 years and older
Conditions the study is for
Rheumatoid Arthritis
What is being tested?
Filgotinib and csDMARDs
Type of treatment
Pill or oral medicine
Could I receive a placebo?
Yes, some participants may receive a placebo
How many people
449 participants
Where
104 sitesin 15 countries
Study dates
27 Jul 2016to 26 Jun 2018
Phase
Phase 3
Are there results?
Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

  • Ages 18 years and older
  • All sexes
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Adult, Older adult

Who may be able to join

  • Have a diagnosis of RA (2010 American College of Rheumatology [ACR]/European League Against Rheumatism [EULAR] criteria for RA), and are ACR functional class I-III.
  • Have ≥ 6 swollen joints (from a swollen joint count based on 66 joints [SJC66]) and ≥6 tender joints (from a tender joint count based on 68 joints [TJC68]) at screening and Day 1
  • Ongoing treatment with a stable prescription of 1 or 2 csDMARDs
  • Have received at least one biologic disease modifying antirheumatic drug (bDMARD) for the treatment of RA to which they have had an inadequate response or intolerance

Who cannot join

  • Previous treatment with any janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor
  • NOTE: Other protocol Inclusion/ Exclusion criteria may apply.

Trial locations and contacts

104 sites in 15 countries.

104 sites in 15 countries

United States55 sites
  • Study site

    Aventura, Florida

  • Study site

    Beaumont, Texas

  • Study site

    Brooklyn, New York

  • Study site

    Charleston, South Carolina

  • Study site

    Charlotte, North Carolina

  • Study site

    Columbia, South Carolina

  • Study site

    Corpus Christi, Texas

  • Study site

    Covina, California

  • Study site

    Cumberland, Maryland

  • Study site

    DeBary, Florida

  • Study site

    Decatur, Georgia

  • Study site

    Detroit, Michigan

  • Study site

    Elizabethtown, Kentucky

  • Study site

    Frederick, Maryland

  • Study site

    Freehold, New Jersey

  • Study site

    Gilbert, Arizona

  • Study site

    Greenville, North Carolina

  • Study site

    Hattiesburg, Mississippi

  • Study site

    Hemet, California

  • Study site

    Huntsville, Alabama

  • Study site

    Jacksonville, Florida

  • Study site

    Kansas City, Kansas

  • Study site

    La Jolla, California

  • Study site

    Lebanon, New Hampshire

  • Study site

    Lexington, Kentucky

  • Study site

    Lincoln, Nebraska

  • Study site

    Memphis, Tennessee

  • Study site

    Mesquite, Texas

  • Study site

    Miami, Florida

  • Study site

    Middleburg Heights, Ohio

  • Study site

    Myrtle Beach, South Carolina

  • Study site

    Oklahoma City, Oklahoma

  • Study site

    Orangeburg, South Carolina

  • Study site

    Orlando, Florida

  • Study site

    Palm Desert, California

  • Study site

    Palo Alto, California

  • Study site

    Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

  • Study site

    Plano, Texas

  • Study site

    Plantation, Florida

  • Study site

    Port Richey, Florida

  • Study site

    Riverside, California

  • Study site

    Saint Clair Shores, Michigan

  • Study site

    Salisbury, North Carolina

  • Study site

    San Antonio, Texas

  • Study site

    St Louis, Missouri

  • Study site

    Toms River, New Jersey

  • Study site

    Tulsa, Oklahoma

  • Study site

    Tupelo, Mississippi

  • Study site

    Upland, California

  • Study site

    Victorville, California

  • Study site

    Webster, Texas

  • Study site

    Whittier, California

  • Study site

    Wichita, Kansas

  • Study site

    Worcester, Massachusetts

  • Study site

    Wyomissing, Pennsylvania

Other trials in United States

Japan15 sites
  • Study site

    Hiroshima

  • Study site

    Izumo

  • Study site

    Katō

  • Study site

    Kawagoe

  • Study site

    Kumamoto

  • Study site

    Narashino

  • Study site

    Okayama

  • Study site

    Sagamihara

  • Study site

    Sapporo

  • Study site

    Shinjuku-Ku

  • Study site

    Takaoka

  • Study site

    Takasaki

  • Study site

    Tokorozawa

  • Study site

    Tokyo

  • Study site

    Tomigusuku

Other trials in Japan

United Kingdom5 sites
  • Study site

    Doncaster

  • Study site

    Edinburgh

  • Study site

    Goodmayes

  • Study site

    Harlow

  • Study site

    Newcastle upon Tyne

Other trials in United Kingdom

Poland4 sites
  • Study site

    Bialystok

  • Study site

    Poznan

  • Study site

    Warsaw

  • Study site

    Wroclaw

Other trials in Poland

Spain4 sites
  • Study site

    Madrid

  • Study site

    Málaga

  • Study site

    Sabadell

  • Study site

    Valencia

Other trials in Spain

Argentina3 sites
  • Study site

    Buenos Aires

  • Study site

    Caba

  • Study site

    San Juan

Other trials in Argentina

Belgium3 sites
  • Study site

    Ghent

  • Study site

    Leuven

  • Study site

    Merksem

Other trials in Belgium

Germany3 sites
  • Study site

    Berlin

  • Study site

    Hamburg

  • Study site

    Ratingen

Other trials in Germany

Hungary3 sites
  • Study site

    Budapest

  • Study site

    Gyula

  • Study site

    Székesfehérvár

Other trials in Hungary

Mexico3 sites
  • Study site

    Chihuahua City

  • Study site

    Distrito Federal

  • Study site

    Mérida

Other trials in Mexico

Israel2 sites
  • Study site

    Haifa

  • Study site

    Ramat Gan

Other trials in Israel

Australia1 site
  • Study site

    Victoria Park, Western Australia

Other trials in Australia

France1 site
  • Study site

    Montpellier

Other trials in France

South Korea1 site
  • Study site

    Seoul

Other trials in South Korea

Switzerland1 site
  • Study site

    Sankt Gallen

Other trials in Switzerland

About this study

Official title: A Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled, Multicenter, Phase 3 Study to Assess the Efficacy and Safety of Filgotinib Administered for 24 Weeks in Combination With Conventional Synthetic Disease-modifying Anti-rheumatic Drug(s) (csDMARDs) to Subjects With Moderately to Severely Active Rheumatoid Arthritis Who Have an Inadequate Response to Biologic DMARD(s) Treatment

The primary objective of this study is to evaluate the effects of filgotinib versus placebo for the treatment of signs and symptoms of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) as measured by the percentage of participants achieving an American College of Rheumatology 20% improvement response (ACR20) at Week 12.

Being tested
Filgotinib, Placebo to match filgotinib, csDMARDs
Medical subject headings
Arthritis, Rheumatoid

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • FilgotinibDrug

    Also called GS-6034

    Tablet(s) administered orally once daily

  • Placebo to match filgotinibDrug

    Tablet(s) administered orally once daily

  • csDMARDsDrug

    csDMARDs may include one or two of the following: methotrexate (MTX), hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine, sulfasalazine, and/or leflunomide (combination of leflunomide and MTX is not allowed)

Study groups in NCT02873936
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
Filgotinib 200 mgExperimentalFilgotinib 200 mg + placebo to match filgotinib 100 mg + stable dose of permitted csDMARD(s)
Receives: Drug: Filgotinib; Drug: Placebo to match filgotinib; Drug: csDMARDs
Filgotinib 100 mgExperimentalFilgotinib 100 mg + placebo to match filgotinib 200 mg + stable dose of permitted csDMARD(s)
Receives: Drug: Filgotinib; Drug: Placebo to match filgotinib; Drug: csDMARDs
PlaceboPlacebo comparatorPlacebo to match filgotinib 200 mg + placebo to match filgotinib 100 mg + stable dose of permitted csDMARD(s)
Receives: Drug: Placebo to match filgotinib; Drug: csDMARDs

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Percentage of Participants Who Achieved an American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20% Improvement (ACR20) Response at Week 12

    ACR20 response is achieved when the participant has: ≥20% improvement (reduction) from baseline in tender joint count based on 68 joints (TJC68), swollen joint count based on 66 joints (SJC66) and in at least 3 of the following 5 items: physician's global assessment of disease activity (PGA) and subject's global assessment of disease activity (SGA) assessed using visual analog scale (VAS) on a scale of 0-100 [0 and 100 indicating no disease activity and maximum disease activity]; subject's pain assessment using VAS on a scale of 0-100 [0 and 100 indicating no pain and unbearable pain]; health assessment questionnaire-disability index (HAQ-DI) score contains 20 questions, 8 components: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip and activities and scored on a scale of 0-3 [0 and 3 indicating without difficulty and unable to do]; high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP). Participants with missing outcomes were set as non-responders.

    Measured: Week 12

Secondary outcomes (40)
  1. Change From Baseline in the Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) Score at Week 12

    The HAQ-DI score is defined as the average of the scores of eight functional categories (dressing and grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and other activities), usually completed by the participant. Responses in each functional category are collected as 0-3 [0 (without any difficulty) to 3 (unable to do a task in that area), with or without aids or devices]. The eight category scores are averaged into an overall HAQ-DI score on a scale from 0-3 [0 (no disability) to 3 (completely disabled)] when 6 or more categories are non-missing, total possible score is 3. If more than 2 categories are missing, the HAQ-DI score is set to missing. Negative change from baseline indicates improvement (less disability).

    Measured: Baseline; Week 12

  2. Percentage of Participants Who Achieved Disease Activity Score for 28 Joint Count Using C-Reactive Protein [DAS28 (CRP)] ≤ 3.2 at Week 12

    The DAS28 score is a measure of the participant's disease activity calculated using the tender joint counts (28 joints), swollen joint counts (28 joints), Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity (visual analog scale: 0 = no disease activity to 100 = maximum disease activity), and hsCRP (CRP=hsCRP) for a total possible score of 1 to 9.4. Higher values indicate higher disease activity. Participants with missing outcomes were set as non-responders.

    Measured: Week 12

  3. Change From Baseline in 36-Item Short Form Survey (SF-36) Physical Component Summary (PCS) Score at Week 12

    The SF-36 is a 36-item, self-reported, generic, comprehensive, and health-related quality of life questionnaire based on 8 health domains in 2 components: physical well-being (physical functioning, role-physical, bodily pain, general health perceptions), mental well-being (vitality, social functioning, role-emotional, and mental health). Each domain is scored by summing the individual items and transforming the scores into a 0 to 100 scale with highest possible score of 100. Higher scores indicate better health status or functioning. Positive change in value indicates improvement and better quality of life.

    Measured: Baseline; Week 12

  4. Percentage of Participants Who Achieved DAS28 (CRP) < 2.6 at Week 24

    The DAS28 score is a measure of the participant's disease activity calculated using the tender joint counts (28 joints), swollen joint counts (28 joints), Patient's Global Assessment of Disease Activity (visual analog scale: 0 = no disease activity to 100 = maximum disease activity), and hsCRP for a total possible score of 1 to 9.4. Higher values indicate higher disease activity. Participants with missing outcomes were set as non-responders.

    Measured: Week 24

  5. Change From Baseline in Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT)-Fatigue Score at Week 12

    FACIT-Fatigue scale is a brief, 13-item, symptom-specific questionnaire that specifically assesses the self-reported severity of fatigue and its impact upon daily activities and functioning in the past 7 days. The FACIT-Fatigue uses 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much) numeric rating scales for a total possible score of 0 to 52. Positive change in value indicates improvement (no or less severity of fatigue).

    Measured: Baseline; Week 12

  6. Percentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 50% Improvement (ACR50) at Weeks 4, 12, and 24

    ACR50 response is achieved when the participant has: ≥50% improvement (reduction) from baseline in TJC68, SJC66 and in at least 3 of the following 5 items: PGA and SGA assessed using VAS on a scale of 0-100 [0 and 100 indicating no disease activity and maximum disease activity]; subject's pain assessment using VAS on a scale of 0-100 [0 and 100 indicating no pain and unbearable pain]; HAQ-DI score contains 20 questions, 8 components: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip and activities and scored on a scale of 0-3 [0 and 3 indicating without difficulty and unable to do]; hsCRP. Participants with missing outcomes were set as non-responders.

    Measured: Weeks 4, 12, and 24

  7. Percentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR 70% Improvement (ACR70) at Weeks 4, 12, and 24

    ACR70 response is achieved when the participant has: ≥70% improvement (reduction) from baseline in TJC68, SJC66 and in at least 3 of the following 5 items: PGA and SGA assessed using VAS on a scale of 0-100 [0 and 100 indicating no disease activity and maximum disease activity]; subject's pain assessment using VAS on a scale of 0-100 [0 and 100 indicating no pain and unbearable pain]; HAQ-DI score contains 20 questions, 8 components: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip and activities and scored on a scale of 0-3 [0 and 3 indicating without difficulty and unable to do]; hsCRP. Participants with missing outcomes were set as non-responders.

    Measured: Weeks 4, 12, and 24

  8. Percentage of Participants Who Achieved ACR20 Response at Weeks 4, and 24

    ACR20 response is achieved when the participant has: ≥20% improvement (reduction) from baseline in TJC68, SJC66 and in at least 3 of the following 5 items: PGA and SGA assessed using VAS on a scale of 0-100 [0 and 100 indicating no disease activity and maximum disease activity]; subject's pain assessment using VAS on a scale of 0-100 [0 and 100 indicating no pain and unbearable pain]; HAQ-DI score contains 20 questions, 8 components: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip and activities and scored on a scale of 0-3 [0 and 3 indicating without difficulty and unable to do]; hsCRP. Participants with missing outcomes were set as non-responders.

    Measured: Weeks 4, and 24

  9. Change From Baseline in Individual ACR Component: Tender Joint Count Based on 68 Joints (TJC68) at Weeks 4, 12, and 24

    TJC was examined on 68 joints of the fingers, elbows, hips, knees, ankles, and toes distal for pain in response to pressure or passive motion at the study time points. Joint pain was scored as 0 = Absent; 1 = Present for each joint. The overall Tender Joint Count ranged from 0 to 68. A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.

    Measured: Baseline; Weeks 4, 12, and 24

  10. Change From Baseline in Individual ACR Component: Swollen Joint Count Based on 66 Joints (SJC66) at Weeks 4, 12, and 24

    The total SJC66 was based on 66 joints (same 68 joints counted in TJC68 minus hips). It was derived as the sum of all "1s" (presence of a joint swelling was scored as "1" and the absence of swelling was scored as "0," provided the joint was not replaced or could not be assessed due to other reasons) thus collected with no penalty considered for the joints not assessed or those which had been replaced. The range for SJC66 is 0 to 66. A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.

    Measured: Baseline; Weeks 4, 12, and 24

  11. Change From Baseline in Individual ACR Component: Subject's Global Assessment of Disease Activity (SGA) at Weeks 4, 12, and 24

    SGA was assessed by the participant using a VAS on a scale of 0 (no disease activity) to 100 (maximum disease activity). A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.

    Measured: Baseline; Weeks 4, 12, and 24

  12. Change From Baseline in Individual ACR Component: Physician's Global Assessment of Disease Activity (PGA) at Weeks 4, 12, and 24

    PGA was assessed by the physician using a VAS on a scale of 0 (no disease activity) to 3 (maximum disease activity). A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.

    Measured: Baseline; Weeks 4, 12, and 24

  13. Change From Baseline in Individual ACR Component: Subject's Pain Assessment at Weeks 4, 12, and 24

    The participant assessed their pain severity using a VAS on a scale of 0 (no pain) to 100 (severe pain). A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.

    Measured: Baseline; Weeks 4, 12, and 24

  14. Change From Baseline in Individual ACR Component: HAQ-DI at Weeks 4, and 24

    The HAQ-DI score is defined as the average of the scores of eight functional categories (dressing and grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and other activities), usually completed by the participant. Responses in each functional category are collected as 0 (without any difficulty) to 3 (unable to do a task in that area), with or without aids or devices. The eight category scores are averaged into an overall HAQ-DI score on a scale from 0 (no disability) to 3 (completely disabled). A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.

    Measured: Baseline; Weeks 4, and 24

  15. Change From Baseline in Individual ACR Component: High-Sensitivity C-Reactive Protein (hsCRP) at Weeks 4, 12, and 24

    Measured: Baseline; Weeks 4, 12, and 24

  16. Percentage of Participants Who Achieved an Improvement (Decrease) in the HAQ-DI Score ≥ 0.22 at Weeks 4, 12, and 24

    The HAQ-DI score is defined as the average of the scores of eight functional categories (dressing and grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and other activities), usually completed by the participant. Responses in each functional category are collected as 0 (without any difficulty) to 3 (unable to do a task in that area), with or without aids or devices. The eight category scores are averaged into an overall HAQ-DI score on a scale from 0-3 [0 (no disability) to 3 (completely disabled) when 6 or more categories are non-missing, so total possible score is 3. Improvement is defined as reduction in HAQ-DI, (baseline value - postbaseline value) ≥ 0.22. If more than 2 categories are missing, the HAQ-DI score is set to missing. Participants with missing outcomes were set as non-responders.

    Measured: Weeks 4, 12, and 24

  17. Change From Baseline in DAS28 (CRP) at Weeks 4, 12, and 24

    The DAS28 score is a measure of the participant's disease activity calculated using the tender joint counts (28 joints), swollen joint counts (28 joints), SGA (VAS: 0 = no disease activity to 100 = maximum disease activity), and hsCRP for a total possible score of 1 to 9.4. Higher values indicate higher disease activity. A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.

    Measured: Baseline; Weeks 4, 12, and 24

  18. Percentage of Participants Who Achieved DAS28 (CRP) ≤ 3.2 at Weeks 4, and 24

    The DAS28 score is a measure of the participant's disease activity calculated using the tender joint counts (28 joints), swollen joint counts (28 joints), SGA (VAS: 0 = no disease activity to 100 = maximum disease activity), and hsCRP for a total possible score of 1 to 9.4. Higher values indicate higher disease activity. Participants with missing outcomes were set as non-responders.

    Measured: Weeks 4, and 24

  19. Percentage of Participants Who Achieved DAS28 (CRP) < 2.6 at Weeks 4, and 12

    The DAS28 score is a measure of the participant's disease activity calculated using the tender joint counts (28 joints), swollen joint counts (28 joints), SGA (VAS: 0 = no disease activity to 100 = maximum disease activity), and hsCRP for a total possible score of 1 to 9.4. Higher values indicate higher disease activity. Participants with missing outcomes were set as non-responders.

    Measured: Weeks 4, and 12

  20. American College of Rheumatology N Percent Improvement (ACR-N) at Weeks 4, 12, and 24

    ACR-N is defined as the smallest percentage improvement from baseline in swollen joints, tender joints and the median of the following 5 items (PGA, SGA, subject's pain assessment, HAQ-DI and hsCRP). It has a range between 0 and 100%. PGA and SGA assessed using VAS on a scale of 0-100 [0 and 100 indicating no disease activity and maximum disease activity]; subject's pain assessment using VAS on a scale of 0-100 [0 and 100 indicating no pain and unbearable pain]; HAQ-DI score contains 20 questions,8 components: dressing/grooming, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip and activities and scored on a scale of 0-3 [0 and 3 indicating without difficulty and unable to do]. If this calculation results in a negative value, then the ACR-N is set to 0. The ACR-N value indicates an improvement of N%, with higher numbers indicating greater improvement.

    Measured: Weeks 4, 12, and 24

  21. Number of Participants With European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Response at Weeks 4, 12, and 24

    Good Response: DAS28(CRP) at visit ≤3.2 and improvement from baseline >1.2.

    Moderate Response: DAS28(CRP) at visit ≤3.2 and improvement from baseline >0.6 and ≤1.2; DAS28(CRP) at visit >3.2 and ≤5.1 and improvement from baseline >0.6; DAS 28(CRP) at visit >5.1 and improvement from baseline >1.2.

    No Response: DAS28(CRP) at visit ≤5.1 and improvement from baseline ≤0.6; DAS 28(CRP) >5.1 at visit and improvement from baseline ≤1.2.

    Measured: Weeks 4, 12, and 24

  22. Change From Baseline in Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) at Weeks 4, 12, and 24

    CDAI is calculated using formula: CDAI = TJC based on 28 joints (TJC28) + SJC based on 28 joints (SJC28) + SGA + PGA. PGA and SGA are assessed using a VAS on a scale of 0-10 [0 and 10 indicating no disease activity and maximum disease activity]. CDAI can range from 0 to 76, with higher score indicating more severe disease activity status. A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.

    Measured: Baseline; Weeks 4, 12, and 24

  23. Change From Baseline in Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) at Weeks 4, 12, and 24

    SDAI is a composite measure that sums the TJC28, SJC28, SGA, PGA, and the hsCRP (in mg/dL). PGA and SGA assessed using VAS on a scale of 0-10 [0 and 10 indicating no disease activity and maximum disease activity]. Higher score indicates more severe disease activity status and total possible score is 0 to 86. A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.

    Measured: Baseline; Weeks 4, 12, and 24

  24. SF-36 PCS Score at Weeks 4, 12, and 24

    The SF-36 is a 36-item, self-reported, generic, comprehensive, and health-related quality of life questionnaire based on 8 health domains in 2 components: physical well-being (physical functioning, role-physical, bodily pain, general health perceptions), mental well-being (vitality, social functioning, role-emotional, and mental health). Each domain is scored by summing the individual items and transforming the scores into a 0 to 100 scale with highest possible score of 100. Higher scores indicate better health status or functioning.

    Measured: Weeks 4, 12, and 24

  25. Change From Baseline in SF-36 PCS Score at Weeks 4, and 24

    The SF-36 is a 36-item, self-reported, generic, comprehensive, and health-related quality of life questionnaire based on 8 health domains in 2 components: physical well-being (physical functioning, role-physical, bodily pain, general health perceptions), mental well-being (vitality, social functioning, role-emotional, and mental health). Each domain is scored by summing the individual items and transforming the scores into a 0 to 100 scale with highest possible score of 100. Higher scores indicate better health status or functioning. Positive change in value indicates improvement and better quality of life.

    Measured: Baseline; Weeks 4, and 24

  26. SF-36 Mental Component Summary (MCS) Score at Weeks 4, 12, and 24

    The SF-36 is a 36-item, self-reported, generic, comprehensive, and health-related quality of life questionnaire based on 8 health domains in 2 components: physical well-being (physical functioning, role-physical, bodily pain, general health perceptions), mental well-being (vitality, social functioning, role-emotional, and mental health). Each domain is scored by summing the individual items and transforming the scores into a 0 to 100 scale with highest possible score of 100. Higher scores indicate better health status or functioning.

    Measured: Weeks 4, 12, and 24

  27. Change From Baseline in SF-36 MCS Score at Weeks 4, 12, and 24

    The SF-36 is a 36-item, self-reported, generic, comprehensive, and health-related quality of life questionnaire based on 8 health domains in 2 components: physical well-being (physical functioning, role-physical, bodily pain, general health perceptions), mental well-being (vitality, social functioning, role-emotional, and mental health). Each domain is scored by summing the individual items and transforming the scores into a 0 to 100 scale with highest possible score of 100. Higher scores indicate better health status or functioning. Positive change in value indicates improvement and better quality of life.

    Measured: Baseline; Weeks 4, 12, and 24

  28. FACIT-Fatigue Score at Weeks 4, 12, and 24

    FACIT-Fatigue scale is a brief, 13-item, symptom-specific questionnaire that specifically assesses the self-reported severity of fatigue and its impact upon daily activities and functioning in the past 7 days. The FACIT-Fatigue uses 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much) numeric rating scales for a total possible score of 0 to 52.

    Measured: Weeks 4, 12, and 24

  29. Change From Baseline in FACIT-Fatigue Score at Weeks 4, and 24

    FACIT-Fatigue scale is a brief, 13-item, symptom-specific questionnaire that specifically assesses the self-reported severity of fatigue and its impact upon daily activities and functioning in the past 7 days. The FACIT-Fatigue uses 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much) numeric rating scales for a total possible score of 0 to 52. Positive change in value indicates improvement (no or less severity of fatigue).

    Measured: Baseline; Weeks 4, and 24

  30. Number of Participants by European Quality of Life 5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) Health Profile Categories at Weeks 4, 12, and 24

    The EQ-5D-5 levels (EQ-5D-5L) is a standardized measure of health status of the participant at the visit (same day) that provides a simple, generic measure of health for clinical and economic appraisal. EQ-5D-5L consists of 2 components: a descriptive system of the participant's health and a rating of his or her current health state on a 0-100 VAS. The descriptive system comprises the following 5 dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression. Each dimension has 5 levels: no problems, slight problems, moderate problems, severe problems, and extreme problems. Rating gets recorded on a vertical VAS in which the endpoints are labeled best imaginable health state is 100 (on the top) and worst imaginable health state is 0 (on the bottom). Higher scores of EQ VAS indicate better health.

    Measured: Weeks 4, 12, and 24

  31. EQ-5D Current Health VAS at Weeks 4, 12, and 24

    EQ-5D-5L is a standardized measure of health status of the participant at the visit (same day) that provides a simple, generic measure of health for clinical and economic appraisal. Participant rates their current health state on a 0-100 VAS. It gets recorded on a vertical VAS in which the endpoints are labeled best imaginable health state is 100 (on the top) and worst imaginable health state is 0 (on the bottom). Higher scores of EQ VAS indicate better health.

    Measured: Weeks 4, 12, and 24

  32. Change From Baseline in EQ-5D Current Health VAS at Weeks 4, 12, and 24

    The EQ-5D-5L is a standardized measure of health status of the participant at the visit (same day) that provides a simple, generic measure of health for clinical and economic appraisal. Participant rates their current health state on a 0-100 VAS. It gets recorded on a vertical VAS in which the endpoints are labeled best imaginable health state is 100 (on the top) and worst imaginable health state is 0 (on the bottom). Higher scores of EQ VAS indicate better health. Positive change indicates improvement (better health).

    Measured: Baseline; Weeks 4, 12, and 24

  33. Work Productivity and Activity Impairment-Rheumatoid Arthritis (WPAI-RA): Mean Percentage of Work Time Missed (Absenteeism) at Weeks 4, 12, and 24

    The WPAI is a questionnaire that measures impairments in work activities in participants with RA which consists of 6 questions: Q1-currently employed; Q2-work time missed due to RA; Q3-work time missed due to other reasons; Q4-hours actually worked; Q5-degree RA affected productivity while working (0-10 VAS, with 0 indicating no effect and 10 indicating RA completely prevented the participant from working); Q6-degree RA affected productivity in regular unpaid activities (0-10 VAS, with 0 indicating no effect and 10 indicating RA completely prevented the participant's daily activities). Outcomes are expressed as impairment percentages: Absenteeism (work time missed) due to RA: 100×{Q2/(Q2+Q4)}. Higher numbers indicate greater impairment and less productivity.

    Measured: Weeks 4, 12, and 24

  34. WPAI-RA: Mean Percentage of Impairment While Working Due to RA (Presenteeism) at Weeks 4, 12, and 24

    The WPAI is a questionnaire that measures impairments in work activities in participants with RA which consists of 6 questions: Q1-currently employed; Q2-work time missed due to RA; Q3-work time missed due to other reasons; Q4-hours actually worked; Q5-degree RA affected productivity while working (0-10 VAS, with 0 indicating no effect and 10 indicating RA completely prevented the participant from working); Q6-degree RA affected productivity in regular unpaid activities (0-10 VAS, with 0 indicating no effect and 10 indicating RA completely prevented the participant's daily activities). Outcomes are expressed as impairment percentages: Presenteeism (impairment while working) due to RA: 100×{Q5/10}. Higher numbers indicate greater impairment and less productivity.

    Measured: Weeks 4, 12, and 24

  35. WPAI-RA: Mean Percentage of Overall Work Productivity Impairment Due to RA at Weeks 4, 12, and 24

    The WPAI is a questionnaire that measures impairments in work activities in participants with RA which consists of 6 questions: Q1-currently employed; Q2-work time missed due to RA; Q3-work time missed due to other reasons; Q4-hours actually worked; Q5-degree RA affected productivity while working (0-10 VAS, with 0 indicating no effect and 10 indicating RA completely prevented the participant from working); Q6-degree RA affected productivity in regular unpaid activities (0-10 VAS, with 0 indicating no effect and 10 indicating RA completely prevented the participant's daily activities). Outcomes are expressed as impairment percentages: Work productivity loss (overall work impairment) due to RA: 100×{Q2/(Q2+Q4) + [(1-Q2/(Q2+Q4) × (Q5/10)]}. Higher numbers indicate greater impairment and less productivity.

    Measured: Weeks 4, 12, and 24

  36. WPAI-RA: Mean Percentage of Activity Impairment Due to RA at Weeks 4, 12, and 24

    The WPAI is a questionnaire that measures impairments in work activities in participants with RA which consists of 6 questions: Q1-currently employed; Q2-work time missed due to RA; Q3-work time missed due to other reasons; Q4-hours actually worked; Q5-degree RA affected productivity while working (0-10 VAS, with 0 indicating no effect and 10 indicating RA completely prevented the participant from working); Q6-degree RA affected productivity in regular unpaid activities (0-10 VAS, with 0 indicating no effect and 10 indicating RA completely prevented the participant's daily activities). Outcomes are expressed as impairment percentages: Activity impairment due to RA: 100×{Q6/10}. If Question 1 (Are you currently employed?) is 'NO', then only the activity impairment score can be determined. Higher numbers indicate greater impairment and less productivity.

    Measured: Weeks 4, 12, and 24

  37. Change From Baseline in WPAI-RA: Mean Percentage of Work Time Missed (Absenteeism) at Weeks 4, 12, and 24

    The WPAI is a questionnaire that measures impairments in work activities in participants with RA which consists of 6 questions: Q1-currently employed; Q2-work time missed due to RA; Q3-work time missed due to other reasons; Q4-hours actually worked; Q5-degree RA affected productivity while working (0-10 VAS, with 0 indicating no effect and 10 indicating RA completely prevented the participant from working); Q6-degree RA affected productivity in regular unpaid activities (0-10 VAS, with 0 indicating no effect and 10 indicating RA completely prevented the participant's daily activities). Outcomes are expressed as impairment percentages: Absenteeism (work time missed) due to RA: 100×{Q2/(Q2+Q4)}. Higher numbers indicate greater impairment and less productivity. A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.

    Measured: Baseline; Weeks 4, 12, and 24

  38. Change From Baseline in WPAI-RA: Mean Percentage of Impairment While Working Due to RA (Presenteeism) at Weeks 4, 12, and 24

    The WPAI is a questionnaire that measures impairments in work activities in participants with RA which consists of 6 questions: Q1-currently employed; Q2-work time missed due to RA; Q3-work time missed due to other reasons; Q4-hours actually worked; Q5-degree RA affected productivity while working (0-10 VAS, with 0 indicating no effect and 10 indicating RA completely prevented the participant from working); Q6-degree RA affected productivity in regular unpaid activities (0-10 VAS, with 0 indicating no effect and 10 indicating RA completely prevented the participant's daily activities). Outcomes are expressed as impairment percentages: Presenteeism (impairment while working) due to RA: 100×{Q5/10}. Higher numbers indicate greater impairment and less productivity. A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.

    Measured: Baseline; Weeks 4, 12, and 24

  39. Change From Baseline in WPAI-RA: Mean Percentage of Overall Work Productivity Impairment Due to RA at Weeks 4, 12, and 24

    The WPAI is a questionnaire that measures impairments in work activities in participants with RA which consists of 6 questions: Q1-currently employed; Q2-work time missed due to RA; Q3-work time missed due to other reasons; Q4-hours actually worked; Q5-degree RA affected productivity while working (0-10 VAS, with 0 indicating no effect and 10 indicating RA completely prevented the participant from working); Q6-degree RA affected productivity in regular unpaid activities (0-10 VAS, with 0 indicating no effect and 10 indicating RA completely prevented the participant's daily activities). Outcomes are expressed as impairment percentages: Work productivity loss (overall work impairment) due to RA: 100×{Q2/(Q2+Q4) + [(1-Q2/(Q2+Q4) × (Q5/10)]}. Higher numbers indicate greater impairment and less productivity. A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.

    Measured: Baseline; Weeks 4, 12, and 24

  40. Change From Baseline in WPAI-RA: Mean Percentage of Activity Impairment Due to RA at Weeks 4, 12, and 24

    The WPAI is a questionnaire that measures impairments in work activities in participants with RA which consists of 6 questions: Q1-currently employed; Q2-work time missed due to RA; Q3-work time missed due to other reasons; Q4-hours actually worked; Q5-degree RA affected productivity while working (0-10 VAS, with 0 indicating no effect and 10 indicating RA completely prevented the participant from working); Q6-degree RA affected productivity in regular unpaid activities (0-10 VAS, with 0 indicating no effect and 10 indicating RA completely prevented the participant's daily activities). Outcomes are expressed as impairment percentages: Activity impairment due to RA: 100×{Q6/10}. If Question 1 (Are you currently employed?) is 'NO', then only the activity impairment score can be determined. Higher numbers indicate greater impairment and less productivity. A negative change from baseline indicates improvement.

    Measured: Baseline; Weeks 4, 12, and 24

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted22 Aug 2016 (estimated)
  2. Study start27 Jul 2016
  3. Primary completion20 Mar 2018
  4. Study completion26 Jun 2018

Resources

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design
Study type
Interventional
Phase
Phase 3
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomised
Intervention model
Parallel groups
Masking
Double blind
Who is masked
Participant, Investigator
Enrolment
449 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT02873936
Sponsor's protocol ID
GS-US-417-0302
Other IDs
2016-000569-21, 2016
Acronym
FINCH 2
Status last verified
Apr 2021
First submitted
17 Aug 2016
Last updated
13 May 2021
Data monitoring committee
Yes
FDA-regulated drug
Yes
FDA-regulated device
No
Individual data sharing
No

Publications

  • Genovese MC, Kalunian KC, Walker D, Gottenberg JE, De Vlam K, Mozaffarian N, et al. Safety and Efficacy of Filgotinib in a Phase 3 Trial of Patients with Active Rheumatoid Arthritis and Inadequate Response or Intolerance to Biologic Dmards [Abstract No. L06]. ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting; 2018 19-24 October; Chicago, IL, USA.

  • Genovese MC, Kalunian K, Gottenberg JE, Mozaffarian N, Bartok B, Matzkies F, Gao J, Guo Y, Tasset C, Sundy JS, de Vlam K, Walker D, Takeuchi T. Effect of Filgotinib vs Placebo on Clinical Response in Patients With Moderate to Severe Rheumatoid Arthritis Refractory to Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drug Therapy: The FINCH 2 Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA. 2019 Jul 23;322(4):315-325. doi: 10.1001/jama.2019.9055.

    PubMed 31334793
  • Taylor PC, Downie B, Han L, Hawtin R, Hertz A, Moots RJ, Takeuchi T. Patients with High Baseline Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio Exhibit Better Response to Filgotinib as Treatment for Rheumatoid Arthritis. Rheumatol Ther. 2024 Oct;11(5):1383-1392. doi: 10.1007/s40744-024-00695-w. Epub 2024 Jul 10.

    PubMed 38985247
  • Curtis JR, Emery P, Downie B, Zhong Y, Liu J, Han L, Hawtin RE, Burmester GR. Filgotinib Demonstrates Efficacy in Rheumatoid Arthritis Independent of Smoking Status: Post Hoc Analysis of Phase 3 Trials and Claims-Based Analysis. Rheumatol Ther. 2024 Feb;11(1):177-189. doi: 10.1007/s40744-023-00619-0. Epub 2023 Dec 6.

    PubMed 38057656
  • Balsa A, Wassenberg S, Tanaka Y, Tournadre A, Orzechowski HD, Rajendran V, Lendl U, Stiers PJ, Watson C, Caporali R, Galloway J, Verschueren P. Effect of Filgotinib on Body Mass Index (BMI) and Effect of Baseline BMI on the Efficacy and Safety of Filgotinib in Rheumatoid Arthritis. Rheumatol Ther. 2023 Dec;10(6):1555-1574. doi: 10.1007/s40744-023-00599-1. Epub 2023 Sep 25.

    PubMed 37747626
  • Combe B, Besuyen R, Gomez-Centeno A, Matsubara T, Sancho Jimenez JJ, Yin Z, Buch MH. Geographic Analysis of the Safety and Efficacy of Filgotinib in Rheumatoid Arthritis. Rheumatol Ther. 2023 Feb;10(1):35-51. doi: 10.1007/s40744-022-00494-1. Epub 2022 Oct 7.

    PubMed 36205910
  • Bingham CO 3rd, Walker D, Nash P, Lee SJ, Ye L, Hu H, Khalid JM, Combe B. The impact of filgotinib on patient-reported outcomes and health-related quality of life for patients with active rheumatoid arthritis: a post hoc analysis of Phase 3 studies. Arthritis Res Ther. 2022 Jan 3;24(1):11. doi: 10.1186/s13075-021-02677-7.

    PubMed 34980223
  • Takeuchi T, Matsubara T, Atsumi T, Amano K, Ishiguro N, Sugiyama E, Yamaoka K, Genovese MC, Kalunian K, Walker D, Gottenberg JE, de Vlam K, Bartok B, Pechonkina A, Kondo A, Gao J, Guo Y, Tasset C, Sundy JS, Tanaka Y. Efficacy and safety of filgotinib in Japanese patients with refractory rheumatoid arthritis: Subgroup analyses of a global phase 3 study (FINCH 2). Mod Rheumatol. 2022 Jan 5;32(1):59-67. doi: 10.1080/14397595.2020.1859675.

    PubMed 33274687

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A Phase 3 study testing Filgotinib and csDMARDs in people with Rheumatoid Arthritis, run by Gilead Sciences at 104 sites in 15 countries.

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 4 inclusion and 2 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.

Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?

The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 13 May 2021. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 104 sites in United States, Japan, United Kingdom, Poland, Spain and 10 more countries. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. Some participants in this study may receive a placebo. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

What does this phase mean?

Phase 3 studies compare the treatment with the current standard treatment or a placebo in a large group, to confirm how well it works and watch for side effects.

Not every study follows the same path, and some studies (observational studies, device studies) have no phase.

Are results available for this study?

Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 15 Jan 2021). A summary is in the For doctors view, and the full results are on ClinicalTrials.gov.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

Percentage of Participants Who Achieved an American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20% Improvement (ACR20) Response at Week 12 (time frame: Week 12). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?

On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT02873936, which also lists 8 linked publications.

Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?

No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.

How often is this information updated?

AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 13 May 2021.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in